(1.) THIS is an application for grant of a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment of a Bench of this Court dated the 14th May, 1965 to which one of us was a party in D. B. Civil Regular First Appeal No. 98 of 1961. THIS application purports to have been made under Arts. 133 (i) (a), (b) and (c) of the Constitution.
(2.) WE may state atonce that so far as the prayer under clauses (b) and (c) of Art. 133 (i) is concerned, it was not pressed before us and, therefore, we shall not say anything about the applicability of these clauses to the present application. The only clause under which the application was argued, and argued strenuously, before us was cl. (a) of Art. 133 (i ). In support of this prayer, it is urged that the subject-matter relating to the suit,out of which this application arises was valued in the Court of first instance of more than Rs. 20,000/- and that the valuation thereof even at the time of the appeal was likewise so. It was further argued that as this Court had dismissed the petitioner's appeal by its judgment in question on the ground of abatement so far as the respondent Ramdan is concerned as his legal representatives had not been brought on the record within the time permitted by law and further on the ground that the appeal against the other respondent Suraj Narain could not be proceeded with in the circumstances of the case, this was not a judgment of affirmance within the meaning of Art. 133, and consequently she was entitled to a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court as of right. Alternatively, it was argued that even if this Court came to the conclusion that its judgment was one of affirmance, though it was not given on merits of the appeal, a substantial question of law was involved in the decision of this Court against which the present application has been brought and therefore he was entitled to a certificate for appeal also. The application has been opposed by the contesting respondent Suraj Narain on both these grounds.